IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.A. PATIL CRIMINAL PETITION NO.9606/2018 BETWEEN:
1. Devaraja S.C. @ Devu, S/o. Channdruraj, Aged about 24 years, Residing at No.499, 11th ‘B’ Cross, Vayyalikaval, Bengaluru-560 003.
2. Srinivas K.T. @ Laggere Shina, S/o.Thimmegowda, Aged about 32 years, Residing at No.14, Sanjeevini Nagar, Near Om Shakthi Temple, Hegganahalli, Bengaluru-560 091. ...PETITIONERS (By Sri. Ranganath Reddy R., Adv. for Sri. Murthy M.V., Adv.) AND:
The State of Karnataka, By Bindiganavile P.S., Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru-560 001. ...RESPONDENT (By Sri.M.Divakar Maddur, HCGP) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Cr.No.99/2017 (C.C.No.273/2017) registered by Bindiganavile Police Station, Mandya for the offence p/u/s 143, 144, 120(B), 341, 307 and 302 r/w 149 of IPC and Section 27 of Indian Arms Act, on the file of Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and JMFC Court, Nagamangala, Mandya District.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R This petition has been filed by the petitioners who are accused Nos.2 and 5, under S.439 Cr.P.C. to release them on bail in C.C. No.273/2017 (Crime No.99/2017) of Bindiganavile Police Station for the offences punishable under Ss.143, 144, 120B, 341, 307, 302 read with S.149 and also under S.27 of the Arms Act.
2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent – State.
3. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners who are accused Nos.2 and 5 have been released on bail by Trial Court and in this Court in Crl. Misc. No.1803/2017 and Crl. P. No.1816/2017 respectively and thereafter they were regularly attending before the Committal Court. But accused No.2 remained absent on 01.09.2018 and hence NBW was issued as against accused No.2 along with other accused persons. On 14.09.2018, since no warrant recall application was filed, accused No.2 was taken to judicial custody. Accused No.5 also remained absent on 29.05.2018 and as such the Committal Court has issued Non Bailable Warrant as against accused No.5 and on 08.06.2018 the accused – petitioner has voluntarily appeared before the Court and that only because no proper applications have been filed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner – accused No.5 he has also been taken to custody. Learned counsel further submitted that the learned District Judge also wrongly read the order sheet and has come to the conclusion that the petitioners are not regularly attending the court. Learned counsel submitted that the accused – petitioners are ready to abide by the conditions that may be imposed and they would regularly attend the Court and are ready to offer sureties. On these grounds, learned counsel prayed to allow the petition.
4. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader vehemently argued and submitted that the petitioners – accused have remained absent and thereby hampering the progress of the case. The order sheet of the Committal Court discloses that the accused - petitioners have remained absent and no proper applications have been filed and as such, they have been taken to judicial custody. On these grounds, learned Government Pleader prayed to dismiss the petition.
5. I have carefully and cautiously gone through the contents of the complaint and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. On close reading of the records, it indicates that the accused Nos.2 and 5 i.e., the petitioners herein, have remained absent on 01.09.2018 and 29.05.2018 respectively, and NBW was issued against both the petitioners. Accused No.2 voluntarily appeared before the Court on 14.09.2018 and accused No.5 voluntarily appeared before the Court on 08.06.2018. The learned counsel appearing for these petitioners has not filed any application to recall the NBW issued and as such, they were taken to judicial custody.
7. As could be seen from the records, accused Nos.2 and 5 were already on bail and were regularly attending the Court and only on one occasion, they have remained absent and no application has been filed to recall the NBW issued against them. Under such circumstances, the Committal Court has inevitably taken them to custody. Under these circumstances, I feel that by imposing stringent conditions if petitioners are granted bail, it would meet the ends of justice.
Accordingly this petition is allowed and petitioners who are accused Nos.2 and 5 are ordered to be released on bail in C.C. No.273/2017 (Crime No.99/2017) registered for the offences punishable under Ss. 143, 144, 120B, 341, 307, 302 read with S.149 and also under S.27 of the Arms Act, subject to the following conditions:
(i) Petitioners shall furnish personal bonds for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- each, with two sureties for the likesum to the satisfaction of the Committal Court.
(ii) Petitioners shall regularly attend the trial.
(iii) Petitioners shall not tamper with prosecution evidence directly or indirectly.
(iv) Petitioners shall not leave the jurisdictional Court without prior permission.
Sd/- JUDGE sac*